California Drivers Can Tank Up WIth Hydrogen

Country_hacker writes "News site TBO.com is reporting ChevronTexaco has opened a hydrogen fuel station in Chino, California, and has plans to open five more. Servicing three (or more) Hyundai SUVs, these prototype fueling stations are a part of a five-year cost-sharing program put on by the Department of Energy. Could this be the 'egg' in the alternate fuels 'chicken or egg?' scenario?"

Slackers

[by Anonymous Coward]

We've had hydrogen refueling in Washington, DC [energy.gov] for months.

Re:Slackers

[pipingguy (566974)]

I did some work (low-level, pressure and piping design stuff) on the trials in Vancouver for buses. This was at least 7 years ago. Our proposal didn't win. I don't remember DC as being a candidate, as it was Vancouver and Detroit at that time.

I'd be interested in the refueling, is it from tube trailers or LH2 trailers?

Liquid hydrogen always sounds scary, but this stuff is road transported every day via million dollar tankers. One of the big industrial gas manufacturers has a video (taken from a local TV station's collection) where a LH2 tanker overturned--nothing happened. Of course, safety and technical specialists from all over had to be called-in to placate the local authorities.

When cold boxes are built (I know as I've designed a few), they are often stencilled on the exterior as CBOX1, PCB1 (pump cold box 1), et cetera. During shipping via Schnabel [sbiii.com] everyone wants to take a look and people worried/ignorant about technology have fits about possible nukular explosions.

SWEET

[by Anonymous Coward]

Now I can buy the 6 figure Hydrogen powered BMW supercar!!!!!

At this stage...

[Capt'n Hector (650760)]

...Isn't it more cost effective to grow your own hydrogen with electrolysis and a solar panel back home?

Re:And safer too

[Sensible Clod (771142)]

Actually, they've gone to some real trouble to make carbon-fiber-reinforced tanks that are *very* hard to bust. I've seen the test footage, and when they finally did manage to bust one (which was no mean feat), it slowly leaked the hydrogen out. What is more, when they ignited the leaking hydrogen, it just burned, Just Like Gasoline; it did not explode.

Incidentally, leaking H2 is somewhat safer than leaking gasoline, because it tends to float up and away instead of accumulate in a growing pool on the ground.

Re:And safer too

[Sensible Clod (771142)]

Hate to Reply to Myself (tm Slashdot Inc.), but i forgot one other thing: another research group has been working on storing H2 as a Nickel-Metal Hydride. Sound familiar? It's the same method used for batteries of the same name. They fill a tank with fine, fine metal powder (mostly Ni), and pressurize H2 into it. The H2 bonds to the powder at the molecular level, which means you can squeeze ~1,000 times more hydrogen into the same size tank. To get the H2 out, you actually have to apply a small amount of heat to the tank. A fraction less efficient, but much safer than your post would suggest.

Re:And safer too

[misleb (129952)]

And how heavy is a tank full of Ni and where does the initial heat come from to release the hydrogen? Why not just devise a better battery and store electricity? Sure would cut out an expensive conversion to electricity or combustion. Hydrogen is not a great fuel. Even if you can make it safe.

-matthew

Re:And safer too

[Sensible Clod (771142)]

They said that the process should eventually allow a 1-liter tank to hold enough H2 to give a Civic-size car a 1,000 km range (assuming it was using a fuel cell). The heat (they said it doesn't take much) comes from the battery pack (most/all fuel cellers have them).

Now as to whether hydrogen is or isn't a 'great fuel', I don't know. But safe it most certainly can be.

Re:And safer too

[pfdietz (33112)]

In any compressed gas, there are two effects going on. First, some molecules are close together and are weakly (and temporarily) bound. This reduces the stored energy in the system. The lower the temperature, the larger the fraction of molecules like this (and, eventually, the gas liquefies).

On the other hand, some molecules, at any instant, are in the process of violently colliding. They are briefly in a state of close approach where some of their kinetic energy has been converted to positive potentia

Re:At this stage...

[diablomonic (754193)]

FIRST: you assume 10 percent efficiency, whereas average decent cells nowadays are more like 20 with good ones around 30

NEXT you assume only one square metre of solar cell space.... how big is your house? mine is around 8*20 metres = 160 m^2

SO if you take my house as an example, you are looking at 160m^2 * 200w (say)per m^2 * 8 decent sunlight hours per day = about 250 KWhours per day IF i cover my entire roof with panels, plenty to power multiple cars and the house and the neighbours house etc etc.

THE only problem with this scenario? due to a lack of widespread investment in solar technology, as opposed to oil or other fossil fuels, solar cells still cost about 5 bucks a watt, so your looking at an upfront investment of about 160 grand to cover my roof in panels. Now obviously i dont quite need that much power, but either way itll be a fair whack of money at current prices (otherwise i wouldve done it long ago). Hopefully some of the new thinner solar technologies coming out soon (within a year or two) will lower prices to a more reasonable level.

Re:At this stage...

[stonecrest (845730)]

Actually, the biggest problem with his analysis, and yours, is that you're looking at equating kW's (power) for some reason instead of energy (kWh). If a car is powered by hydrogen, its power requirement is fulfilled solely by the capacity of the fuel cell - it has nothing to do with the solar panels at all. It's a matter of how quickly you can extract the energy of the hydrogen gas per unit of time via the fuel cell. Now, if you REALLY wanted to find out how long it would take to charge your car, you hav

Re:At this stage...

[bleckywelcky (518520)]

I doubt that.

20 % efficiency

1 m^2

200 w/m^2

6 sunlight hours per day

1200 kWh

At least a 10 year lifespawn

4,272,000 kWh to produce a 1 m^2 solar panel? Gimme a break.

Sure, unless you want to take yout SUV outta town.

[way2trivial (601132)]

hmm.. it's easy for me to run outta gas (Never actually done it) but how easy is it for tow-trucks to retrofit to fuel up vehichles on the road-

Hey! no more sucking on the hose when I siphon gas!

I hope this takes off

[aendeuryu (844048)]

Something like this could be really good for Korea (Hyundai is a Korean company) if it took off. This country desperately needs to look at alternate fuel sources. Air pollution here is pretty bad. If this was commercially successful, it could mean some improvements over here.

Re:I hope this takes off

[nacturation (646836)]

But would only old people use alternate fuels?

The "egg" is already there

[Tau Zero (75868)]

Unfortunately, nobody's trying to hatch it. The "egg", of course, is the electrical grid, and despite the previous programs to promote electric vehicles there appears to be little support for plug-in hybrids which could "refuel" on non-petroleum energy almost anywhere for little additional trouble or expense.

Re:The "egg" is already there

[dbIII (701233)]

support for plug-in hybrids which could "refuel" on non-petroleum energy

Hydrogen vehicle fuel has never been about saving energy - it's about shifting the pollution from the street corner to big power plants that have the space for anti-pollution gear and big high stacks to put it up where it will disperse. In a lot of cases its another way to get fuel out of coal, or fuel from hydro.

Someone is bound to put a nuclear troll in here - since a form of energy is mentioned.

You've missed the news, I see

[Tau Zero (75868)]

As it is, hybrids barely beat out economy cars. Add 300 pounds more batteries, and they will actually get worse gas mileage, once those batteries run down.

If not wrong, at least debatable on all points.

1. Hybids can do considerably better; for instance, the Accord hybrid is tuned for performance while still delivering fairly good economy (design tradeoff).
2. At least one Future Truck hybrid managed to add all the hybrid features to an Explorer while subtracting weight from the smaller engine and superfluous

So where can I buy a hydrogen car?

[rsborg (111459)]

If this is the egg, then where's my chicken [google.com]?

Besides, why Chino, of all places... why not somewhere people might actually care to buy it, like say The People's Republic of Berkeley, of SF central?

Demand...

[qw0ntum (831414)]

The 'egg' in this whole thing is demand. I'm totally for hydrogen powered vehicles but companies aren't going to invest the money in the infrastructure until there is a market for it. A refueling station is great, but there are only three cars that are going to be able to use it.

What needs to be done is some kind of joint effort between auto makers and fuel companies to simultaneously release H fueling stations and H powered cars. This is a nice first step, but it's not going anywhere until there is widespread adoption.

Re:Demand...

[Planesdragon (210349)]

Funny how GM has been helping to pass around the idea the HYBRID vehicles are more expensive than conventional vehicles and people won't pay the price.

1: They are, and we don't. If we were all willing to pay the price, sometime over the last five years we'd have had more than just four hybrid cars in America.

2: GM (yes, THAT GM) has hybrid city busses that they're trying to sell. Albany's CDTA has one that is subbing for the #11, still with all the ads from the 04 conventions. (And, really, they're a

To Be Viable, Need more Hydrogen Cars

[reporter (666905)]

In order for these hydrogen stations to be viable, we need more hydrogen-powered cars. They need to be a regular fixture on the Californian highways. Right now, I see a hydrogen-powered car only about once per year.

With any luck, these hydrogen stations will mark the beginning of the end for Islamic tyranny from the Middle East. For too long, we have essentially financed terrorist operations by paying money for gasoline. They money goes to, for example, Saudi Arabia. The Arabs then secretly funnel a bit of that money to anti-American groups in the Middle East.

We end up financing the terrorists. Only a hydrogen-based economy will put an end to this nonsense.

Next question is "Can we build jet fighters and bombers that run off hydrogen?"

Re:To Be Viable, Need more Hydrogen Cars

[grozzie2 (698656)]

The reality is, commercial quantities of H2 come from natural gas, so, it's still gonna be coming from a fossil fuel source. On the bright side, ng is very difficult to ship overseas in any kind of quantity, economically. It travels much better in pipelines. I think it'll be GREAT to see the us become dependant on ng instead of crude, they import most of that from the folks north of them, instead of the folks across the pond. And when you say something about useing electricity to create hydrogen, dont f

Why it won't work that way

[MichaelPenne (605299)]

hydrogen fuel takes energy to make, so we'll still buy plenty of oil to make the hydrogen. Getting the US nuclear power industry going again in a big way is the only (short term, eg decades rather than centuries) way to dramatically reduce our dependency on oil. PS for those who modded parent troll, where do YOU think most of Al Qaeda's funding for 911 came from? Hint, it was neither Iraq nor Afghanistan...

It's not for public use

[Animats (122034)]

Here's the Chevron/Texaco fact sheet. [chevrontexaco.com] It's just a demo site to fuel five experimental Hyundai SUVs, and it's located at a Hyundai R&D center.

It makes its own hydrogen, though, from natural gas.

Re:It's not for public use

[flyingsquid (813711)]

This program is such bullshit.

Seriously. Five SUVs? we really want to do something serious about curbing emissions and conserving energy, today, we start by legislating higher fuel economy for existing vehicles; that will do something. Maybe in twenty years hydrogen technology will be advanced enough to be a large part of the solution to our energy and pollution woes, but currently, all spending a few bucks on hydrogen technology does is give the automotive and petroleum industries the ability to say, "loo

Re:It's not for public use

[Ralph Wiggam (22354)]

I've read some articles that say corn-based ethanol is pretty much a scam to raise the demand for (and price of) corn. Apparently producing corn ethanol requires a shit ton of energy and fossil fuels. People are tripping over themselves to create "clean" and "renewable" energy, but they're losing sight of the big picture and the laws of physics.

I'm not going to find a site because it's late.

-B

Re:It's not for public use

[Vellmont (569020)]

But what you've missed is that it takes as much energy in fossil fuels to produce a gallon of ethanol as is released when you burn it. The benefits of ethanol as a renewable energy source are very debateable. I'd bet bio-diesel is a lot more energy positive though.

It is going to be extremely difficult for any renewable source to take hold until all the non-renewable sources are gone.

Not true. We're probbably never going to run out of fossile fuels, it's just going to become increasingly expensive to get them. Not all fossile fuels have equal costs in getting them out of the ground and into a useable state. Canada for instance has a trillion barrels of oil in the form of tar sand. They're very costly to extract into a useable form though. The point is that as fossil fuels become increasingly expensive renewable sources will become econmically viable. The costs associated with renewables will also likely only go down as more money+research gets pumped into them from the profits of usage.

This is actually one of the reasons that OPEC doesn't want high oil prices. High oil prices only encourage investments in other energy sources, which eventually only undermines oil prices.

I'm waiting...

[halcyon1234 (834388)]

For the idiot with a gas powered car to refill at the station, and the frivilous lawsuit that will follow. Assuming they survive the explosion, of course...

What happened to ethanol?

[ryanw (131814)]

While I was in Brazil I noticed something unique. Ethanol AND Gasoline are both available at every gas station (I guess it should be called a fueling station). Here's an extremely informative website that shows some charts of ethanol.

http://www.distill.com/World-Fuel-Ethanol-A&O-20 04 .html

Why is the US going with Hydrogen instead of ethanol? I know that ethonal is more like "diesel fuel" so it requires the engine to heatup before starting the car in colder areas, but it seems that ethanol is already widely in use in other countries. Seems odd the US goes with hydrogen and everyone else is using ethanol.

Re:What happened to ethanol?

[dotwaffle (610149)]

But ethanol is a crappy idea - it's got a lot of drawbacks, and it essentially needs to be "grown". A much better alternative is the old Vegetable oil way of doing things - BioDiesel. Almost every filling station in Europe stocks Diesel and BioDiesel works in most if not all Diesel engines. The enormous benefit is the turnaround time, as it is a continuous, rather than a batch process (for those Chemists out there).

Let's not go changing most of the mechanical parts if all we need to change is the fuel...

BioDiesel, grown from Rape Seed etc, would give not only American's reason to get the farms up and running again, but also third world countries - a lot of farmers will grow this stuff and sell it very cheaply, to be refined elsewhere. BioDiesel _will_ revolutionise the European lorry (sorry, truck) market, such a shame that the USA won't be able to partake - you're far too reliant on petrol (the stuff you normally fill up with). 10 years, and you may be ready, Europe is ready NOW. Let us be your Guinea pig. Do you hear that [insert current UK Home Secretary]???

Re:What happened to ethanol?

[wiggles (30088)]

Sorry, but you're mistaken on America's commitment to Biodiesel. Your comment on Biodiesel giving American farms a reason to exist again is well heeded by the powers that be, who are sick of providing subsidies to farmers so they'll stop growing. For more info, go here [biodiesel.org].

Re:What happened to ethanol?

[pfdietz (33112)]

An even better idea is Fischer-Tropsch diesel with the synthesis gas coming from gasified biomass. This uses all the energy in the plant -- cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin, everything -- not just starches or oils produced in seeds. You can even extend it by providing the steam for gasification using nuclear energy (instead of by burning some of the biomass).

Re:What happened to ethanol?

[drinkypoo (153816)]

Biodiesel has been energy-positive for quite some time now. It doesn't yet allow for making a profit, though, at least not with U.S. fuel prices. Maybe in europe. Check out "Energy Balance/Life Cycle Inventory for Ethanol, Biodiesel and Petroleum Fuels [state.mn.us]". Specifically, "the energy yield of biodiesel is (3.2/0.83) 280 percent greater than petroleum diesel fuel". You could also read the cited paper, "Life Cycle Inventory of Biodiesel and Petroleum Diesel for Use in an Urban Bus [nrel.gov]". (PDF) The significant paragra

Re:What happened to ethanol?

[wiggles (30088)]

The US Ethanol effort [ethanol.org] is a lot bigger than you imagine, especially here in the midwest, where the corn that is fermented to produce ethanol is grown. All of our gasoline fuels are now blended at 10% ethanol, and the major auto makers are making cars that will run on 85% ethanol [e85fuel.com], which is provided at various fueling stations [e85fuel.com].

No, this isn't very important

[pfdietz (33112)]

This is not part of a 'chicken and egg' situation. Lack of fueling stations is not what's holding back hydrogen cars. What's holding them back is: (1) lack of range (due to the low energy density of compressed hydrogen gas, and lack of practical alternatives), (2) cost of hydrogen itself, and (3) the still very high cost of fuel cells. The last point is important, since hydrogen as a fuel makes very little sense for internal combustion engines -- since the hydrogen is made from natural gas, you might as well just burn natural gas in the vehicle, or a liquid fuel derived from gas.

BTW, if it's oil independence you want, Fischer-Tropsch diesel fuel is already very competitive at today's oil price (it would be competitive with oil at $25/barrel.) Expect many more synfuel plants to be built if oil stays expensive.

My car runs on CNG (compressed natural gas)...

[Harry Balls (799916)]

...not on hydrogen, and a little-known law allows me to drive solo on carpool (HOV) lanes in California.

Disadvantages:
- short range (only about 180 to 185 miles)
- higher purchase price (about $5000 more for a new car)
- limited number of CNG refueling stations (have to plan refueling stops ahead)
- cannot use the car for cross-country trips due to insufficient network of CNG stations
- There is the occasional moron who thinks I'm a carpool lane violator and turns on the high beams behind me
- There is the occasional dumb cop who thinks I'm a carpool lane violator and pulls me over, only to let me go 2 minutes later

I expect a hydrogen car to have similar advantages and similar disadvantages.

Here in Sydney

[mpesce (146930)]

CNG is available in the vast majority of service stations. It blew me away when I first got here - being an American, I had no idea it was in widespread use.

Good points:
- It's a lot cheaper than gasoline, about .40 AUD per liter vs. 1 AUD for gasoline (and Australia has some of the lower gas prices in the world)
- A liter of CNG gets you (just about) as far as a liter of gasoline
- It's less polluting

Most of the Sydney-area taxis use CNG for precisely this reason. The one person I know who owns a CNG-fueled automobile for personal use has a brother-in-law who owns a taxi company, so he got a stock vehicle, and had it painted (Sydney taxis are white)... He loves it.

Wait a minute...

[HunterZ (20035)]

From the article:

The Chino center will use natural gas as a feedstock, to use the extensive natural gas infrastructure that is already in place. "Natural gas is an established, very efficient way to make hydrogen," he said.

So, really, we'll just be trading one non-renewable natural resource (petroleum) for another (natural gas)?

Hydrogen is NOT an Energy Source ...

[Ron Bennett (14590)]

While much of the masses have been hoodwinked into believing hydrogen fuel is alternative, an important detail few realize is that hydrogen is NOT an energy source ... it's only a tranport medium.

Where is most of that hydrogen going to come from? ... yep, "big oil"/energy producing companies, as some others have already pointed out.

In the end, folks will pay more for more complicated vehicles which cost more to operate - and there will likely be about the same, if not more pollution than now when factoring in the production of the hydrogen fuel; producing energy is still a messy business - even solar and wind power create pollution, though admittedly much less than say coal, but I digress.

In a nutshell, "hydrogen" is NOT a energy source, but rather only a transport medium - the way to truly reduce pollution from energy production/use is less consumption and/or more efficient energy production methods.

Ron

Hydrogen: boondoggle or scam?

[by Anonymous Coward]

To make things clear, hydrogen is not a source of power. It is merely a way of transmitting or storing power. Hydrogen comes from either electricity, or is extracted from natural gas. Electricity can be "green" to various degrees. Natural gas is no more "green" than other fossil fuels.

So, if what we're talking about is a storage/transmission system, how does hydrogen add up? Very badly is the answer.

To store any usable quantities of hydrogen requires one of the following: extremely low temperatures, extremely high pressures, or some chemical to absorb it. Low temperatures are not practical for automotive applications because it requires constant energy input to keep it cold. Extremely high pressures or absorbing it into hydrides are sort of practical but you end up with either a very large, expensive high pressure tank that holds a small amount of hydrogen, or you end up with a large, very expensive bit of palladium or whatever that's going to hold a small amount of hydrogen.

So getting hydrogen requires a very expensive and inefficient process which (today) is derived from fossil fuels. It can only be stored in small quantities and the storage itself is extremely expensive. Oh, it also does best with fuel cell engines which also require extremely expensive catalysts (more palladium, etc).

So in the end we come out with numbers in the neighborhood of a $150k vehicles that has a range of 150 miles and has a cost per mile of 50 cents, just for the fuel. Sounds like a winner to me!

Compare this to electric cars. Electricity is distributed and available everywhere. There are green sources of electricity which are cost-competitive, and improving. The big expense in electric cars is the battery. Lithium is the best choice, and it is coming down in price rapidly. Range on a lithium battery cars can go over 200 miles.

When you look at the pros and cons, the only advantage we see in the end for hydrogen is that it can be refuelled quickly. You pump it into your car and go on, just like with gasoline. But are the downsides worth it?

I can't help but think that this whole hydrogen thing is an enormous, almost fraudulent exercise in scamming subsidies from the government to support a technology which is outrageously expensive. I would rather see natural gas refueling stations, rather than see stations that sell hydrogen extracted from natural gas.

I also have a feeling that part of the push for hydrogen is a push to maintain huge barriers to entry in the auto manufacturing industry. It will require enormous technology resources and patent portfolios to produce a hydrogen car. With electrics, on the other hand, anyone can do it in his garage, once batteries become available. That must be scary to the industry; they haven't faced any new entrants into the market in a long time.

Stop hydrogen!

fuel cells cost a lot/do we have enough platinum?

[marcmerlin (48598)]

After reading this page [lifeaftertheoilcrash.net] about a worst case scenario of what could happen after we run out of oil, I've come to wonder if its claims that we don't have enough platinum on earth to make fuel cells feasible for cars is true. Does anyone know either way?

One thing is a confirmed fact though, they cost a lot to make 1 million US$, and they may come down to $100,000 in 10 years. What a bargain!

I sure hope they can make fuel cells work, but everything I've read seems to indicate that best case, it's not a done deal quite yet.

Convert your car..

[Daxster (854610)]

It's been done for only a few grand - http://unitednuclear.com/h2.htm [unitednuclear.com] Make your own solar powered hydrolysis machine in your backyard :)

Attribution

[guttentag (313541)]

The Associated Press is reporting the story, not TBO.com (see same exact story here [yahoo.com] on Yahoo news).

See Chevron's press release here [yahoo.com].

See U.S. Federal Gov't press release on this here [yahoo.com].

The Hyundai Hindenburg.

[Solder Fumes (797270)]

Sounds about right. Once we get nuclear-powered SUVs maybe we can start naming them after presidents. "And now the six-o'clock news. Interstate 90 was blocked today after a fiery accident involving the Eisenhower and the Monroe. Several smaller vehicles were also involved, including the Oklahoma, California, and . None of the drivers were injured, cushioned in their titanium-armored luxury staterooms, though several thousand local inhabitants are missing."

Arnold's opening ceremony, and other follies

[ziegast (168305)]

While he's wondefully wealthy and can afford to buy one just for the sake of having one, Arnold was at least showing some leadership recently when he bought a GMC Hummer "H2H" converted to run on hydrogen rather than fuel. Just look for "Hydrogen Hummer Governor Arnold" at news.google.com or your favorite news outlet. Here's one article [motortrend.com].

The gas station to fill his ride is at LAX airport. How that would help the Governator working in Sacramento is beyond me. Who wants to go to LAX every time you need to fill up? and how many miles can a big beefy Hummer go before it needs a refill? The Chino multi-station pilot test at least seems more practical.

Speaking of practical, just how practical is hydrogen going to be, anyway? Unless there is a huge improvement in the abundance of energy needed to seperate hydrogen atoms from water (or methane or other sources), other methods like bio-diesel or just plain electric are going to be more pratical ways to reduce US dependence on oil. If we somehow are able to implement pebble-nuke plants like the Chinese are doing [techcentralstation.com], hydrogen processing might become more cost-effective.

Re:Great!

[lobotomy (26260)]

Just where do you think the hydrogen comes from? The cheapest way to get hydrogen is by cracking natural gas. So much for getting away from fossil fuels. Also, anyone who thinks that only water (vapor) comes out of the exhaust is wrong. That would be true if all that went into the engine were hydrogen and oxygen. Guess what? The air is 80% nitrogen. NOx formation can be a problem with hydrogen engines. The hydrogen itself also has properties that make for a bad fuel: it has such a low density that it is hard to carry much fuel and hydrogen can find the smallest holes to escape from that other gases would not.

Re:Hydrogen production..

[paganizer (566360)]

...and it was produced by Standard Oil, right?
You can make Hydrogen with a nuclear reactor. you can also make it with pretty much any steam source.
1 cold war era nuclear bomb could potentially generate enough hydrogen to run the state of texas's autos for 2-3 months or more, if every car in texas was converted over to H.
(Info provided to me by a Navy nuclear engineer)

Biodiesel is probably the most viable for now.

[MtViewGuy (197597)]

Biodiesel is really what we should be concentrating on right now. Biodiesel pours right into pretty much any existing diesel engine and has only slightly less BTUs per gallon that petroleum diesel. Certainly biodiesel isn't as clean as hydrogen, but it's a whole heck of a lot cleaner than petroleum diesel and even more so than gasoline. The best part of biodiesel is the fact that you can start using it immediately in your unmodified diesel powered vehicle and not have to worry that you're going to be able t

Re:HYDROGEN MINE FOR SALE

[Winkhorst (743546)]

Wonder of wonders! I have half a BILLION DOLLARS stashed away in a Nigerian bank from the estate of the late President Mbawasa Ngimima of Upper Revolta just waiting for a way to get it out of the country. Perhaps we could work out an arrangement...